This is a thread for discussion... How can creation ministries become more kid friendly?

WHY is it so important that we reach children with the truth of the Lord Our Maker through means that they can readily receive and understand?

But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven. Matthew 19:14

Views: 46

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

 

Adults need to brainstrom. AND the point that Kyle Hornsey makes is EXACTLY CORRECT.  Creation ministries have spent years and years telling kids what their questions should be.

And even if we let them ask their own question, we still just give the answer to another question - the one that we had decided that they should be asking. They ask, where did the Oak Tree come from? AND we launch into a lengthy discussion of DNA, the genome, and the Phylogentic Tree. . . .SIGH, and the kids give up ever asking a question of that adult again.

And it seems to me that we have spent years talking over the heads of children - talking about right and left-handed amino acids, and quarks and quasars, and DNA. . .

Meanwhile the youngsters keep playing with their toy dinosaurs, and watching Star Trek Cartoons .  .  . and swallowing Evolution Hook, Line, and Sinker.

If we wanted to start some sort of kid friendly app, or YouTube Channel, or Internet Kids Creation Club - (where kids are allow to participate with parental permission) then we should be sure that we are involving KIDS in designing the platform, whatever it may be.

Scripture says, "A Child shall lead them," and "Out of the mouth of babes has thou perfected praise."

I am really hoping that people simply will begin to list THEIR OWN simple specific ideas.
OUR OWN ideas, not so much url of other people's ideas.
And like Kyle says, we want to gather ideas and input directly from Kids.
I want to discuss these things HERE, in an easily accessible FORUM, and not in a private/direct message on Facebook. The ideas I am hearing from people in that private medium are too good to be hidden from public view. - in a private discussion, or in a bunch of inaccessible facebook posts that no one can ever relocate and maintain a sane train of thought. 
Steven said:
No, I agree with you.
I'm on board. 🙂
Jim responds:
Good, so lets continue the discussion here. . . .
HOW CAN the OUTREACH TO KIDS BE ENHANCED?
Why is is so important?
So we have shared so many things about reaching kids here in so many private Facebook chats - BUT, lets take it public! Lets talk about it here in a public forum. Let us try to Influence others.
I know Facebook is public, but it does not work well for an on-going "WORK SESSION" of productive and accessible discussion.

Creation ministries can become the most kid-friendly only if they involve significant serious effort to show how deeply to which Genesis 1 comports with the fact that the completed Earth is a life-support system.

No normal child ever first or best loved the stars. And to the degree to which children love animals, they would find equal love for knowing how deeply Genesis 1 comports with that love...

...because if we all lived in space ships, every child would naturally seek to known how those ships' life-support systems support an animal's life.

The only reason why Genesis 1 is not currently so sought is because virtually nobody of any wide good repute tells anybody how Genesis 1 is about life-support. The best that most kids ever get for that end is that Genesis 1 tells about the creation of animals.

And the worst things that kids currently are being given in that regard is that Genesis 1 is so 'authoritative' that we must assent to whatever it is that it seems to us to spell out. But since when is ancient Hebrew an alternate lexicon for modern Anglo-Saxon grammatical conceptual schemes?

Cosmologically, light is trivial: it is everywhere. Given that life is rare and localized in the cosmos, light also is 'life-indifferent'. In fact, if the Earth suddenly lost its life-critical, light-mediative atmosphere, the Sun's light would roast the Earth to death. So light not only is trivial and life-indifferent, it is dangerous to life without some means of mediation.

This mediation is first seen in Genesis 1:2, according to which there was 'darkness upon' the primordial waters. This kind of term, 'darkness upon', when in a terrestrial context, implies the presence of dense cloud (ex: Luke 23:44, Exodus 14:20, Deuteronomy 4:11, Joshua 24:7, 2Samuel 22:12, Job 3:5, Job 17:12, Job 22:11, Job 38:9) that blocks out the Sun. The main point is not the cloud itself, but its result upon life or life's home. Darkness.

Of course, life needs light, and this 'darkness upon' is speaking to that need. But, as already mentioned, light is not, in itself, good for life. Life must first have its own proper element: liquid water. Only by interaction between this element and the light is a home for life made possible. This is the hydrological cycle.

The hydro-cycle is why, of all the Creation Days, God does not call 'good' the work of Day Two. Only when the terrestrial surface has been formed to complete that cycle, on Day Three, is there an explicit estimation of 'good'.

This cycle is then completed, in its own terms. But that is not the end, but only the beginning. The cycle cannot self-maintain without both plant and animal life. If all flora on our completed Earth suddenly and permanently ceased to exist, the planet would become a dry roasted ball of lifeless rock in a matter of days.

And it is life's critical membership in the water cycle that explains the terminological differences between the portion about the sea animals and that about the land animals. To only the sea animals does this obviously short-and-sweet-account record a blessing (v.22). Likewise, only to the sea animals is there the 'bara' (created, v. 21)), for the primary issue, there, is of animal life, as such.

Of course, the estimation of 'good' is given each to the sea animals and the land animals. This is because there must be animals living in both of the Earth's two kinds of surfaces. The horizontal exchanges of water must by maintained as well as the vertical. So the Earth's water cycle is a fully-substantiated duality: a perfect cross. This cross is alternately realized as the ying-yang principle, most popularly known by the circle graphic comprised of two equal black and white curved water-dropplet-shaped halves each of which has a circle within it of the opposite color. The Hindus may have somewhat corrupted the ying-yang meaning, by less-or-more supposing that even wickedness and righteousness are themselves nothing more than the two halves of one whole. But the shape itself is true to the normal functioning of the cosmos in its support of life. In fact, this popular ying-yang symbol actually is seen both in Genesis 1 and in the relation between Genesis 1 and Genesis 2. In Genesis 1, the shape's truth is composed by the relation between the material of the account's textual central portion and that of the surrounding account. There is analogue to this in Genesis 2, specifically of the relation between the material in its own textual central portion (about the four rivers and the treasures) and that of the rest of the account. But it is the relation between Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 that puts these two separate yin-yangs together.

So, is Genesis 1 to be understood to deal explicitly with trivially universal physics? Not likely. Nevertheless, this in no way precludes as invalid a consideration of the text in terms of physics. Indeed, it is precisely because of the particular ying-yang of Genesis 1 that the total of the three of them allows a triangulation to the life-critical fine-tuning of the cosmological constants.

Jim simple videos from you Tube are excellent teachers on DNA.  Kids learn from vid's given a basic one that covers the basics and so on.  I have observed some of these myself.  we know our kids are really smart.  I really like what you said about them asking questions as opposed to how to think or what to say.  Jim In my humble opinion, we need to teach them the scirptures first.  If they have no spiritual basis for their views then how do they defend it.  In the beginning of John where it speaks of the logos and all things consist and exist, I have used this on very educated people and taken them into a discussion of DNA and why a "guided" out come is the only possible explanation for life. If you use terms that define your view over say an evolutionist, you have a leg up in putting across your views.  But all the learning has got to start with Scripture in my humble opinion, which I think in this area the church is deficient or does not put value on it.  Jim the thing parents and church don't understand is they are going to be put in the position of addressing some of these ideas and issues for their whole lives.  Having that biblical base and then understanding God's work in nature and what we actually have left to observe starts with a slo but deliberate education.  Unfortunately I had to train myself as my colleagues in the fields that I work in are all evolutionists.  Our kids should have an answer for what they believe not only spiritually but from the position of creation. I ahve found that intelligent design sites have very good articles to help train kids and others.  Intelligent cause helps address some of our biblical issues of believe and understanding and also allows for good exchanges with believers....

I appreciate your post and I think that while there is a gulf between us, I support your post whole heartedly and it is visionary in that the church is deficient in understanding how important the subject is in not only the fields of science, but in defending the faith even for both of us....Cheers!!  

Jim you may not have this approach at all to teaching kids, but if you would consider using some of these phrase in discussion with evolutionists and anti, these "pen words" used in the sciences seems to get across creationist views better?  Young adherents to creationism should familiarize themselves with some of these terms in my humble opinion, it will help them to keep on the same playing field as evolutionists and help get there points across.

Intelligent cause

Guided mechansim

Non-guided mechansim

Self-determinism

Convergence

Intelligent design

"designer"

Guided event

DNA infromation

Pre-biologic substrate

Body Plan

Ancestory

Hybridization

Horizontal exchange of information

Stasis

Variation

Morphological

Multi-platform creation event

Taxonomy

Still way over my head.... Sigh. And over the heads of most 10-year olds that I know. ANd over the heads of most adults too. And we are continuing to lose them.

My desire is too avoid technical language an what we might think of as "important" and find out from Kids what it is that is moving them to accept evolution... I don't think "pre-biologic substrate" or "convergence" is close to a concern for most 10-year Olds that I'm ministering to....

There is the Jewish ideal, that I have heard of, regarding how to meet at table.

After everyone is assembled to eat, and after the Patriarch prays, and after they have quoted a portion of scripture, they share about their respective day's experiences, and about their thoughts on God and scripture. This sharing begins with the youngest, and proceeds finally to the oldest, and is summed up by the Patriarch. Only in that way does the Patriarch daily preach.

Notice that this ideal would normally hold in times of peace. It may not hold in times of severe persecution, and when anything even akin to a Rat Race kind of haste is practiced by those who are assembled.

Of course, the lack of a Rat Race haste is a matter of cultural integrity, or, at least, of a newfound practiced realization that God is no Divine Micro-manager and Dictator.

Is the Bible mainly of God's verbal dictation? If not, then neither should be a child's 'education'. We are God's image as humans, not circus animals. Much less are we simulated computing devices that have no sense but what is explicitly dictated into them. We are more variable than the machines we make to serve us.

.

Jim my post was based on education at appropriate levels, so no it wasn't for 10 year olds.  Again I still appreciate the post you put up...

I am so burdened about this dear brother, when I think of all the tens of thousands of words that I have written - and to what END? Millions are still swallowing the lies that the world made itself, while well-meaning saints like me make noise with our faces, and write more and more words, and create new "talking heads" videos that have great meaning to those who already receive the Creator - but they are of no use to the ten-year old swept up in evolution deception.

Lou Hamby said:

Jim my post was based on education at appropriate levels, so no it wasn't for 10 year olds.  Again I still appreciate the post you put up...

And even 20-year old college students are still deceived by the same simple lies that have ensnared 10-year olds. The answers they need are very simple. And those skeptics who think they need the complicated answers really don't. THEY need the simple answers.

How can we simplify the concepts articulated above, by my friends Daniel and Lou?

A child knows very simply that a horse is a horse of course of course - and a cat is a cat at that, and a mouse is a mouse, and never a louse. A moose is a moose and never a mongoose nor a goose. NO AMOUNT OF TIME can ever be enough to make one kind turn into another kind.

SIMPLE. SIMPLE.

There is confident simplicity in the truth of God.

Reply to Discussion

RSS

About CC

Connecting Christians who believe in Biblical Creation — discussing beliefs, sharing ideas, and recommending evolution-free resources. Please keep all posts relevant to the topics of this community.

Rules of Engagement
Zero Tolerance Policy
Statement of Faith
Creation Terms
FAQ

Homeschool Curriculum

Members

Creation Conversations 2017

What's new @ CC for 2017? Stay tuned and keep checking back. More ask the experts, more creation networking and much more in store for Creation Conversation Members. You'll not want to miss this new year!

© 2017   Created by Creation Conversations.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service